SynthesisBMC medical ethics2020
A systematic review of patient access to medical records in the acute setting: practicalities, perspectives and ethical consequences.
Synthesis in BMC medical ethics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
30 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Non-empirical methods for ethics research on digital technologies in medicine, health care and public health: a systematic journal review.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2024Pooled it
- A Systematic Review on Visualizations for Self-Generated Health Data for Daily Activities.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Pooled it
- The Impact of Digital Patient Portals on Health Outcomes, System Efficiency, and Patient Attitudes: Updated Systematic Literature Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Pooled it
- Ethical Challenges in Research Involving Hospitalized Patients: A Phenomenological Study.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2026Article
- Does clinical documentation reflect how parents and clinicians share decisions about surgery?BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Should Malaysia Widen Patient Access to Medical Records? An Ethical Analysis.Asian bioethics review · 2026Article
- Patients' and Providers' Preferences and Perceptions for Imaging Information for Patients: Cross-Sectional Survey Study.Journal of participatory medicine · 2025Article
- Does Clinical Documentation Reflect How Parents and Clinicians Share Decisions About Surgery?Research square · 2025Article
- Preventing chronic kidney disease and maintaining kidney health: conclusions from a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Controversies Conference.Kidney international · 2025Article
- LLMonFHIR: A Physician-Validated, Large Language Model-Based Mobile Application for Querying Patient Electronic Health Data.JACC. Advances · 2025Article
- Patients' Understanding of Health Information in Online Medical Records and Patient Portals: Analysis of the 2022 Health Information National Trends Survey.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Optimising digital advance care planning implementation in palliative and end-of-life care: a multi-phase mixed-methods national research programme and recommendations.BMC medicine · 2025Article
- Identifying Medication Review Topics to Be Documented in a Structured Form in Electronic Health Record Systems: Delphi Consensus Survey.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Navigating the Complexities of Nursing Documentation When Patients Have Access to the Content: A Qualitative Study.Journal of advanced nursing · 2025Article
- Value Propositions for Digital Shared Medication Plans to Boost Patient-Health Care Professional Partnerships: Co-Design Study.Journal of participatory medicine · 2025Article
- Views of patients with progressive illness and carers about the role of digital advance care planning systems to record and share information: A qualitative study.Palliative medicine · 2024Article
- Design and implementation of a prototype radiotherapy menu in a patient portal.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
- Impact of notification policy on patient-before-clinician review of immediately released test results.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2023Article
- Impact of the Immediate Release of Clinical Information Rules on Health Care Delivery to Patients With Cancer.JCO oncology practice · 2023Article
- Perspectives of Patients About Immediate Access to Test Results Through an Online Patient Portal.JAMA network open · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInternationally, patient access to notes is increasing. This has been driven by respect for patient autonomy, often recognised as a primary tenet of medical ethics: patients should be able to access their records to be fully engaged with their care. While research has been conducted on the impact of patient access to outpatient and primary care records and to patient portals, there is no such review looking at access to hospital medical records in real time, nor an ethical analysis of the issues involved in such a change in process.
methodsThis study employed a systematic review framework in two stems, to integrate literature identified from two searches: Medline, CINAHL and Scopus databases were conducted, (for (1) hospitalised patients, patient access to records and its effects on communication and trust within the doctor-patient relationship; and (2) patient access to medical records and the ethical implications identified). The qualitative and quantitative results of both searches were integrated and critically analysed.
results3954 empirical and 4929 ethical studies were identified; 18 papers representing 16 studies were identified for review (12 empirical and 6 ethical). The review reveals a consensus that our current approach to giving information to patients - almost exclusively verbally - is insufficient; that patient access to notes is a welcome next step for patient-centred care, but that simply allowing full access, without explanation or summary, is also insufficient. Several ethical implications need to be considered: increased information could improve patient trust and knowledge but might transfer an (unwelcome) sense of responsibility to patients; doctors and patients have conflicting views on how much information should be shared and when; sharing written information might increase the already significant disparity in access to health care, and have unforeseen opportunity costs. The impact on medical practice of sharing notes in real time will also need to be evaluated.
conclusionsThe review presents encouraging data to support patient access to medical notes. However, sharing information is a critical part of clinical practice; changing how it is done could have significant empirical and ethical impacts; any changes should be carefully evaluated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.